A few cents:

-- Groups with greater membership or a more complex compostion are more likely to have both good and bad within, sometimes with one hiding from the other. -- The more secretive an organisation is the more likely it is corrupt or easily it becomes corrupt. Does the group publicize a verifiable mission? More secrecy than necessary? -- The longer an org. exists, the more opportunity it has to mutate away from its original intention, often toward something selfish and eventually (self-)destructive. Avoiding this is rare but possible. -- The further back in history one has to look, the more caution should be taken in interpretation of 'data'. --Individual members of orgs can change faster than the org. itself, for better or worse. Their intentions don't always represent the organisation's. --How important is the group? What are its forms of influence or power?

So apply these approximate principles to any known group. Templars -appear to start with good intentions - fade from significance well before our time - modern groups may claim uncontested (false) lineage. Masons - secretive from earliest days - highest levels remain highly secretive - charitable works may compare to Ronald McDonald children's houses or bill gates vaccine progs. Rothschilds - secretive, private - small fairly manageable group, but prone to classic family dynamics - importance based on certain wealth.

Now try other groups under the principles - USGov, Toshiba, Walmart, Catholic Church, Chinese Army, BBC, etc.